[p. 296]
B. Second potency of infinity, ideality, in the formal, or in relation
Cross-reference: Possession, exchange, price and contract: § 45 ff., on value § 63, on contract § 72 ff.; on marriage, which is no contract, § 75 Remark and § 161 ff.; on lordship and bondage § 57 Remark.
It is the subsumption of intuition under the concept, or the coming-forth of the ideal, and the being-determined of the particular or singular by it; it has causality, but as purely ideal; for this potency is itself a formal one; the ideal is only the abstraction of the ideal; there is not yet any question of its constituting itself as such for itself and becoming a totality; as in the previous potency the singular, so here the universal is dominant; in the first, the latter remains hidden, something inner, and speech itself is there considered only as a singular, in its abstraction.
In this subsumption singularity immediately ceases; it becomes a universal, which has absolutely relation to others. But through this formal concept the living natural connection likewise becomes a fixed relation, which it previously was not; over it, too, universality must hover and subjugate it; love, the child, culture, the tool, speech, are objective and universal, connections, relations, but natural, unsubjugated, contingent, ungoverned, not themselves taken up into universality; universality is on and [in] them themselves, not come forth nor opposed to them.
If this subsuming universality is regarded from the side of particularity, then there is nothing in this potency which would not have relation to other intelligences, so that an equality among them [is] posited; or it is the universality which thus appears in them.
a.
This relation of the opposed universal to the particular, as it appears in the particular, or subsumption of the universal under intuition; the universal, itself dominant in the singular or particular, relates only to this
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.